To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
No. Mac OS X, as it is now, is the evolution of what Next had in 1988 (and, likely, earlier.) the same lead engineer was working on Mac OS X from the genesis of the Mach kernel at Carnigie Melon, right up till 10.5. His name is Avie Tevanian - google him.
What Apple did was slowly replace the ageing subsystems with sections of more modern BSD code (usually FreeBSD), but the project was continuous and progressive. If you look at OpenStep and then at Rhapsody, you can see the evolution towards Mac OS. You then look at Mac OS X Server 1.x (which is nothing to do with Mac OS X 10.x Server directly), and you see the basis for the Mac OS X public Betas. It was a continued evolution, not a sudden change. Yes the kernel is now XNU, but it evolved out of the Mach R&D with concepts from BSD bolted on. The driver model is akin to that of OpenStep, and Linux at the time would have been a giant step backwards.




Member since:
2007-09-22
I've never really looked into the history of it.
I thought the Mac OS X UI and application framework was based on NextStep and so on.
I also thought the Darwin part, thus the base OS, did not exists before the Mac OS X project and was based on parts of FreeBSD and an existing micro kernel project.
My thought was, what if the base OS was Linux.
As I've not looked into it. It might not have been able to make it work. Maybe the other parts of Mac OS X just can't function without the micro kernel.